The effect of nutritional supply on clinical outcomes and nutritional status in critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy.
10.4163/jnh.2015.48.3.211
- Author:
Ju Yeun KIM
1
;
Ji Myung KIM
;
Yuri KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Clinical Nutrition, The Graduate School of Clinical Health Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 120-750, Korea. yuri.kim@ewha.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
continuous renal replacement therapy;
energy support;
protein support;
clinical outcomes;
nutritional status
- MeSH:
Adult;
APACHE;
Biomarkers;
Calcium;
Cholesterol;
Critical Illness*;
Electronic Health Records;
Hematocrit;
Humans;
Intensive Care Units;
Length of Stay;
Malnutrition;
Mortality;
Nutritional Status*;
Renal Replacement Therapy*;
Serum Albumin
- From:Journal of Nutrition and Health
2015;48(3):211-220
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate whether nutritional supply influences biochemical markers and clinical outcomes in patients who received continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) by evaluating adequacy of nutritional supply for patients. METHODS: From January 2012 to December 2013, 239 adult patients who received CRRT in the intensive care unit for more than 3 days were included. General information from electronic medical records and nutritional status related biochemical data and clinical outcomes on the first day of CRRT and 2 weeks after CRRT were collected. RESULTS: The rate of delivered energy and protein was 68.06% and 43.13% which was much lower than energy and protein supply based on their requirement. When the patients were divided into two groups according to 70% of energy received rate and 50% of protein received rate, the group with more than 70% of energy received rate showed significant decrease of length of hospital stay (p = 0.007), length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 0.008), duration of CRRT (p < 0.001), and APACHE II score (p < 0.001) compared to less than 70% of energy received rate after adjusting for age. In addition, the group with more than 50% of protein received rate showed decreased mortality (p = 0.031), length of hospital stay (p = 0.008), length of ICU stay (p = 0.035), duration of CRRT (p < 0.001), and APACHE II score (p < 0.001) after adjusting for age. We found that the level of hematocrit (p = 0.006) was significantly improved in the group with more than 70% of energy received rate, and the level of TLC (p = 0.049), hematocrit (p = 0.041) was significantly improved in the group with more than 50% of protein received rate. We also found that energy delivery was negatively correlated with length of stay in ICU (p = 0.049) and positively correlated with level of calcium (p = 0.037). In addition, protein delivery was correlated with the levels of serum total protein (p = 0.021), serum albumin (p = 0.048), hematocrit (p = 0.009), and total cholesterol (p = 0.021) when dead patients were included, but was correlated with the levels of hematocrit (p = 0.034) and calcium (p = 0.024) when dead patients were excluded. CONCLUSION: Proper nutritional delivery may help patients' clinical outcomes for patients receiving CRRT. However, their actual intakes of energy and protein were not adequate for their requirements. Identification of patients with malnutrition is necessary and a multidisciplinary approach for systemic management is also required.
